By: Sofia Chassomeris, News Writer
This provincial election season has been a frustrating time. No, let me rephrase. Every election since learning what first past the post (FPTP) is has been a frustrating time. When you’re a kid, you’re taught democracy is fair, and puts power in the hands of the people. Unfortunately, the electoral system that we use in Canada, both provincially and federally, doesn’t put power in the hands of the majority — let alone the people as a whole.
To understand why FPTP is non-representative both on the provincial and federal level, we must look to the electoral districts. BC has 93 electoral districts that each vote to elect a member of the Legislative Assembly. Whichever party has a majority of the seats in parliament (47) has full control of the provincial legislature. In the 2017 provincial election, we had a minority government for the first time in over 50 years, where neither of the two most competitive parties (the NDP and former BC Liberals) were able to reach a majority of the seats. Until the NDP gained a majority in 2020, Green Party MLAs held a balance of power in the Legislative Assembly, since their votes were needed by either party to gain a majority and pass legislation. The same is happening again this time around, though the official vote is yet to be confirmed.
At a fleeting glance, FPTP might seem like a true majority-rules system, because if 40% of the population is voting for one party, and the rest of the population is split among the others, it is technically a “majority.” However, this is known as a “false majority,” which is when governments hold a majority of seats, despite a majority of total voters (say, 60%), casting their ballots for another party.
The 2015 federal election saw the Liberal Party take control of government with only 39.5% popular support. Because there is absolutely no representation for voters whose candidates did not win in their electoral district, elections often produce results catering to one part of the total population. There is little to no consistency between terms if a different party takes complete control every election. The province can have drastically different policies in effect every four years. For instance, the BC provincial government passed the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act into law in 2019 as a framework for reconciliation based on the United Nations’ declaration. The BC Conservatives have stated plans to immediately repeal this law, if they win a majority government.
The BC Green Party has shown extensively on their platform, as well as during the leader’s debate, that they care about the quality of life for all British Columbians — not just the middle or upper class, who the NDP and Conservative parties both seem to be tripping over their shoes for. The Green Party is concerned for our youth and our future amid the climate crisis and are committed to investing in longevity. They understand it is much more effective to put money into education, healthcare, and housing — ensuring that people are able to live in stable and healthy conditions rather than waiting for a disaster and scrambling to clean it up. This is also significantly more financially responsible.
The BC Conservatives plan to increase police spending. The NDP leader backtracked on the decriminalization of drugs while allocating funds to build involuntary care facilities, which have been shown to increase chances of relapse. This brings us to my recent dilemma, one I know is shared by many: do I vote for who I actually want to win?
The answer is no — for me, at least. My riding is competitive, and if I wanted my vote to have any influence in this election, my only real options are NDP or Conservative. Instead of voting for the party with a comprehensive platform and evidence-based policies that will improve life for many people, I have to vote “strategically.” Voting for who I actually want means there’s a higher chance that the people I definitely don’t want will be elected. So I take my voter registration to a polling booth, shove a spoon of more of the same in my mouth, and force it down with a cup of diluted hope.
We should try to be optimistic, though. There are more effective alternatives to first past the post — alternatives which a majority of Canadians would actually prefer. For example, proportional representation (PR) would eliminate the need for strategic voting because the amount of seats a party has in the legislature would reflect the percent of the population which voted for them. If 30% of voters supported a party, that party would hold 30% of legislative seats. A poll done by FairVote Canada found that 90% of people across the country and political parties agree with the fundamental principle of a proportionally representative system.
A common criticism of PR is that it would lead to coalition governments forming, similarly to minority governments, which could lead to obstacles of disagreement when passing legislation. This criticism isn’t one I find compelling. If we cannot trust our elected officials to collaborate in our best interest, why are we electing them? A government should reflect the needs and wants of the people it serves, and our current first past the post electoral system does a terribly lacklustre job. It is time for a government by us all, for us all.
